| Author
|
The God Virus
|
Maine Coon
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
1659
Posted : Jun 9, 2011 03:55
|
Quote:
|
On 2011-06-09 01:06, moki wrote:
you remind me so much of the last guy i had in the last weeks, who was desperately trying to turn me to a krishna devotee. he was a brilliant scientific mind, and is still brilliantly intelligent on the field of physics and programming.
but he just could not grasp the idea that the god in my world does neither have a name, nor a form, nor moral rules that are strictly given to me in a scripture.
|
|
Tina, I think you misunderstood my role in this discussion. As in “turned it 180 degrees”. 
I am not trying to push any religious view on anybody, nor do I insist that everybody should conform to a uniform way of thinking (about anything). In fact, I did not even mention my own beliefs until it was dragged out of me. I think you confused me with Pauldo. 
I very much liked your explanations of where you stand on this issue, though. I may not share many of your beliefs but at least I understand what you’re saying and respect your views. As for the names, I actually don’t mind calling God “God”, because after all it’s just a man-made name – as good or bad as any other. If somebody associates it with sweaty palms of pedophiles or with suicide bombers – it’s their problem, not mine. It’s funny, though – in spite of all your feminist beliefs, you still refer to God as “He”. I am not a feminist but I’ve been calling God “It” for many years. There is logic to this but I will not go into details here.
Oh, yeah, almost forgot: organized religion sucks – I agree with you here.
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 9, 2011 16:29
|
Hm, and i think i understood quite well your role in the discussion but not my own role, while you suddenly mentioned my name with an advice to team up with pauldo.
why should we team up - because we are both atheists? you know, in a scientist debate i am adviced to team up with spiritual devotees. at the end i can't team up with anyone because i dont fit into the model of anyone
i agree with your view about science and religion, it is even the same way i see things. and if i use the word he for god ( did i ?) , then it is only because i try to use the same language that the people have. this is not always easy, especially if you try to communicate with any possible culture on the globe expressing the same single thing that means the creation. it is a common behaviour pattern, that people then start to persuade you in what they believe, and have the feeling you wouldnt understand it, whereas you actually see things very similarly but use totally different word constructions to name them...so the shamans might talk about pacha mama and the mother nature, or the underworld and the world of dream travel, others might talk about deities and demons, others find it unspeakable to pronounce god ( see kabala), and others have more than 300000 names for an archetype. and again others are only interested in neuroscience and neurolinguistic programming and believe we create our own gods. i personally am sure that we are all right, or all wrong, both at the same time.
but as i said, in my world view god does not have sexes, not even a form or a name. i dont even call "him , her or it" by name and i dont prey (any more). i just prefer to look for it in scientific synchronicities and accidents and in deterministically chaotic ordered manifestations.
this is what suddently reminded me of that latest experience with that latest guy, because i actually totally agreed on his views about science and god ( he is professionally engaged into quantum programming and accident generators). but it is just always the same behavioristic model, that i have with people who believe in a god with a name and a form ( no matter krishna, or any hindu deity, or the christ etc). they talk about their view and i accept it and understand it completely, and then at the end they tell me that i will nevertheless need to evolve more to see that god loves us and never forgets us, even if we forget him for a while and that i would be an atheist because i lost god.
i dont see it this way. but i would not go into detail right now - it is always the problem i have with this section that topics are usually going to nowhere:).
because there are two little facts we could discuss to let the discussions evolve into a debate. spiritual science would be more appealing to me.
|
|
|
|
Maine Coon
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
1659
Posted : Jun 9, 2011 20:00
|
Quote:
|
On 2011-06-09 16:29, moki wrote:
Hm, and i think i understood quite well your role in the discussion but not my own role, while you suddenly mentioned my name with an advice to team up with pauldo.
|
|
I am still not sure what my role in this discussion is, other than testing my own patience… 
Anyway…
That thing I said about you two pairing up had nothing to do with the substance of this discussion, actually. Only with the manner in which you two communicated your views to others at that time. In retrospect, I realized that what I wrote was not nice and I would not wright it this way today. I still believe it stemmed from some valid observations, though. At the time it did, at least. Your posts changed a lot around the same time you changed your name.
Quote:
|
you know, in a scientist debate i am adviced to team up with spiritual devotees. at the end i can't team up with anyone because i dont fit into the model of anyone
|
|
Nor do you have to.
Which is exactly what I am trying to remind Pauldo. But it seems to be a waste of time. If he thinks he needs to whip us all into the One and Only Correct Way of Thinking – let him think that.
Quote:
|
they talk about their view and i accept it and understand it completely, and then at the end they tell me that i will nevertheless need to evolve more to see that god loves us and never forgets us, even if we forget him for a while and that i would be an atheist because i lost god.
|
|
Or they can say that you still need to evolve and embrace atheism, for otherwise you are committing a cognitive misstep. 
Quote:
|
spiritual science would be more appealing to me.
|
|
What is it?
|
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 10, 2011 12:36
|
well, this is also the general missunderstanding with the god-atheism discussion. "the way to communicate things" and the inability to actually see what the person is saying ...and the ability not to stick on how he is saying it and communicating an idea. me personally i very often provoke a debate with stating the contrary of what i believe and then wait for the contrary reaction. it helps me construct a view of polarity and chose which side i consider more realistic or in the best case i take both sides as correct and transcend the question. the less questions in my mind, the better i feel. unfortunately i have too many.
i have the feeling, i am often seen as atheist by spiritual people. this could not be wronger, because i have a deep belief in mystics and an extreme humbled respect towards the wonder of the creation. and i put overnatural phenomenon aside, because it is not something i " believe", it is something i "know" and "experience". belief is imo the ability to realize the powerful mystical energy behind all things, in front of which we are all small and extremely mortal. and to realize we know nothing.
but i often feel missunderstood in front of spiritual people, because they sometimes claim, i am sticking into my own position and i am trying to communicate my belieds without understanding the bigger picture - that there is god, and he or she usually always carries the name these certain people gave to him. i often feel in the center of a few groups of people, some of them are talking to me that krishna is the most powerful god, others do the same with shiva, third ones fill my head with atman and the unpersonal godly being. others try to turn my to the light and the christ. and there are shamans who call all previous people mentioned "esoteric jerks" , inclluding me, and say there is only the spirit of nature and plants.
at the end, i said to myself, who is actually the one communicating harsh and egocentric? me or them? i accept them all, i dont believe in what they do, but i accept them around me, all of them. they dont accept my view though. so they tell me to evolve and to get to know god. what if i did already? what if they are the ones to grow a bit?
i makes me sad to see they are mostly stuck into ttheir view but claim this to be the case vice versa. they tell my to be the one who hasnt opened the horizons enough, to know god.
well anyway. as i said, this atheist-god debate would never end and is going nowhere. i started to learn one of the best ways to cope with this unendless emptiness that is created by that debate: ignore. ignore is a powerful tool that i need to learn more. ignore makes us strong because sometimes there is simply nothing constructive to do or say with somebody except to give him time for himself.
and again, it was one of the greatest relationship in my life ( the one mentioned above), to have someone who is so deeply engaged in both science and krishna. he helped me learn a lot on my way. actually i dont even know if it is over, but lets wait till the male-female issue is over and then things always get clearer and more deep.
|
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 10, 2011 12:43
|
Quote:
|
On 2011-06-09 20:00, Maine Coon wrote:
Quote:
|
spiritual science would be more appealing to me.
|
|
What is it?
|
|
well, anything that has to do with more than spiritual growth, moral and belief, which are all issues of subjective perspective. anything that has to do with facts and figures, about what we can do to move on and evolve as a civilization....
how to put any other scientific field on the basis of spirituality. this is what interests me.
..biology, physics, chemistry, mathematics, architecture, any field of life that deals with facts ....how to connect those facts to the basis of spirituality. this is what i care for. not so much if there is krishna or shiva or whoever you call it.
|
|
|
|
Login
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
65
Posts :
1707
Posted : Jun 10, 2011 20:32
|
What kind of connection are you seeking?
What do you think those fields have to say about human spirituality?
For example, as maybe you are aware many scientist between 1200-1700 had this idea that understanding the world was a search for god. Its this kind of idea you are referring to?
Or more in the lines of using scientific knowledge to improve, assuming it exists, our spiritual experience?
Pls give an example of what you personally will like to experience regarding this science-spiritual connection.
 "The dedication to repetition — the search for nirvana in a single held tone or an endlessly cycling rhythm — is one of electronic music's noblest gestures." |
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Jun 10, 2011 21:51
|
well, the search for god in science might be a strong personal motivation for the scientist, but it is exactly what i did not refer to. because i see a potential for conflicts, if this is the main goal of science : then A would say " i found god in the quantums and the theory of probability", B would say " i found god in the string theory" and C would shout " no you idiots, ever thought to define a black hole and that god is inside". you know. and again new conflicts arise, because the search for god can never be completed and it is not in our evolutionary capabilities to complete it. those who think they did, are only involved in a conflict about whose god is the right one.
no, i was referring more to improving our pragmatic daily life. what are the problems of our daily life :
- the social disbalance and the economical crisis; wealth of some on costs of others
- the collapse of our ecology and the necessity of a better more advanced agriculture
- the diceases, the uncurable disbalance of our body, the screaming isolated psyche of the modern man
- the architecture of the big cities which often feels like a prison for the soul
- the emotional crisis and last but not least our inner peace as humans and as a human community
and a lot of other things but you see...it is all about using scientific knowledge together with spiritual knowledge to improve our daily life problems. and ia m sure that spirituality alone would not help any further to anyone, because it is far away from our daily problems and pragmatic life. and being spiritual is not the only side of the coin, because we humans need evolution of our daily life tools. science on the other hand, doenst help us alone either, as it is more and more proving to give the wrong and "! not sustainable long run " solutions
like for example. you take the trance culture. while things were going more or less okey, it was a powerful improvement of our daily life, at least if it was used for the means of a tribal healing ritual. oy, nowadays it has not that goal any more, mostly not. but it was an example of how we could use science and spirituality hand in hand and achieve a lot of improvement for our human community....
|
|
|
|
|
